If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Andrew Tridgell pissed Larry McVoy off which caused him to change the license to BitKeeper. Linus wrote git, hg and bzr were "ooh ooh me too" projects.

Not very accurate. Git and hg were started in parallel roughly round the same time but the ui. especially for git during that time was very raw and bzr was supposed to solve that problem but it has been held back by the slowness and other issues

It does appear that Canonical has stopped funding launchpad and bzr (and not because the projects are "done") but I don't fault them for it. They have invested considerably in both and neither have turned out to be the grand success they envisioned.

Comment

Which caused BitKeeper to immediately become irrelevant and fall into obsoleteness.

Which explains why the company is still in business. Turns out BitKeeper has features that git, hg, and bzr don't have, like the ability to lock a file for editing, which is important in large projects.

Comment

For a stagnant project bazaar is quite stable. And for the record because it has simple interface, is stable and cross-platform it's quite popular among scientists. Although nowadays git and mercurial are also getting quite popular in the community.

Oh, yeah, it's great. Just don't try to use it with large projects. It doesn't seem to write out to disk until it has pulled all changes. Simply impossible to sync with a project that has more than xMB worth of changes on a system with less than xMB.

Comment

Bzr was actually the development branch of arch, the gnu dvcs that no one used. That's the only part of my post that wasn't accurate. Anyway, bzr is part of gnu, so why aren't they maintaining it?

Mercurial wasn't a "me too" project. It was started just around the time git was written.

Also you are talking about the original Bazaar project. Bzr was written from scratch.

There is no separate team for GNU projects ready to take over maintenance when they are abandoned. It is all just the originals developes chosing to do their work under the GNU governance. It is the same with Apache or whatever else.

Comment

It does appear that Canonical has stopped funding launchpad and bzr (and not because the projects are "done") but I don't fault them for it. They have invested considerably in both and neither have turned out to be the grand success they envisioned.

AFAIK Canonical still employs several development teams to work on Launchpad (the teams work in a rotation on either new features, bugfixes, etc.), a QA team, and last year hired a new community contact for Launchpad users & customers. To me that doesn't sound like they "stopped funding" it...

Comment

AFAIK Canonical still employs several development teams to work on Launchpad (the teams work in a rotation on either new features, bugfixes, etc.), a QA team, and last year hired a new community contact for Launchpad users & customers. To me that doesn't sound like they "stopped funding" it...

From what I heard from a Canonical employee, both Bzr and Launchpad funding has been dropped recently along with the move to stop UDS as a real life conference and other seemingly cost cutting measures.

Comment

Yes it was, weren't you paying attention back then? Linus knew he needed a vcs, started git, Matt Mackall thought he could do a better job of it and said "ooh me too."

Bzr is Bazaar-NG, numnuts.

Mercurial was started in parallel and announced a few days apart. Matt wasn't aware of Git when he started writing Mercurial.

Also, the original Bazaar project was a fork of Arch but bzr-ng which was later renamed to bzr wasn't a fork but written from scratch and the original project is now called Baz. Your name calling doesn't change that.